4th grade at a Christian school. My brother was getting into Metallica and so I was also getting into Metallica. Gave a friend a my brother’s copy of Kill 'Em All and that he could borrow it for three days.

My folks didn’t really care, but his mom raised hell over it. If you don’t know the album, look up it’s cover. Its got a bloody hammer in the center with Kill 'Em All st the bottom. She raised hell and I get called into a meeting with the principle and my folks.

I don’t remember what was said, but my dad wasn’t going to take any shit from them. I was there to learn and I was a good kid so they can fuck right off. Frankly, I don’t remember having any suspension or detention from it. What I do remember was them throwing out the cassette and knowing how pissed my brother would be. That was the real punishment.

The satanic panic was dumb. And I was lucky enough to not even know it was going on.

we define “science” as the aggregate consciousness of scientific researchers

This is something I wish I could preach convincingly to everyone. The activity of scientists, a social group, are arguing and trying to convince one another that their interpretation of the data acquired by using their tools and methods is what become a scientific consensus.

Forefronting the method (often a vaguely defined one rooted in a hypo-deductive model from about 150 years ago that most people learned in grade school) removes the relationships between people and other people and people and institutions.

I wish I could find the paper but there’s a wonderful enthographic study on how scientists interact with each other to transform the discourse.

Edit: Found it! Science as Social Knowledge: Values and Objectivity in Scientific Inquiry by Helen E. Longino

Reminded me of this.

There are no evil viruses. Some are just detrimental to us.

Why does this matter?

Over, under, and misuse have resulted in adaptations by bacteria. Which is to say, life evolves. Its too bad, and there is still a role for antibiotics in our world, but we have to trim our use of it.

Course lengths for antibiotics isn’t well studied. From this article:

In fact, the optimal length of treatment in many common infections is not well studied and may be more than a little arbitrary. One infectious diseases doctor has suggested, somewhat satirically, that most of our current rules for antibiotic administration have more to do with the number of days in the week than they do with robust scientific evidence.

We have a growing and, frankly, terrifying issue of antibiotic resistant bacteria from over prescribing and longer than necessary courses.

I’m not denying that modern evolutionary theories use math and I think it’s important, but that in many sciences, math isn’t the focus like it is in physics. A lot of good science can be done without math. Darwin did good science without math.

To be very clear, science doesn’t need math. We use math as a tool to accurately describe phememona and relationships with math.

I don’t what you are saying about models being mathematical by definition eben if people can handle it. I don’t see how the model of the cell is mathematical. Models require relationships and not mathematics to describe those relationships.

I’m not familiar with what they do. Describe it and I might be able to. Or not.

I hate how we center physics and it’s use of mathematical tools as the right way of doing science. Many, if not all sciences today, leverage mathmatical tools to create models. But Darwin, as far as I recall, didn’t use math at all. A whole host of sciences don’t approach their problems through mathematically described laws or even statistical models. Earth sciences, botany, anatomy, organic chemistry, ethnography, and archelogy come to mind.

Engineering is not science. It uses science.

I’m currently in a non-Western country. Tiered pricing is the norm. They just aren’t interested in exploiting your data or tracking your behavior.

The one response you got was just like, “But there’s just ONE rule.” totally missing your point.

https://proton.me/black-friday

Throwing my vote in for Gauss.

Have a clear and honest conversation with your wife. “She thinks it’s fine” is not enough. And know your concern and worries more clearly. For example, “The age gap is representative of an emotional maturity gap.”

And you might be right. But that doesn’t matter. She need to know for herself in her own way. And she needs to feel like she can trust you to not hold it against her if they do go “wrong”.

Either way, have an emotionally honest conversation with your wife.

Kevin went full ACAB.